Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How has D&D changed over the decades?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8608926" data-attributes="member: 6701124"><p>I find it odd that you wouldn't have more faith/hope/expectation in a GM that you heard good things about than one you hadn't heard anything. But YMMV.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Were the areas of mismatch not gone over in session 0? What questions/information could be put in a session to avoid these mismatch problems.</p><p></p><p>"Why is the arrow only one direction?" It doesn't seem to be, but I can't think of any other ways to convey that it isn't.</p><p></p><p>Who says GMs are inviolate? In what sense? No one has said all GMs are good. Lots of people say D&D is set up by default where the GM has the final say in play. Because it is set up that way in the rules, isn't it?</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said it was a great model, and gave a second (not-great one) with a higher percent of badness for the DM. The idea was just how there are more non-DM players than DM players, and so the P[at least one bad player] can be a lot larger than P[player j is bad]. Which seems relevant to a game continuing if one wanted to work out the odds. Obviously it wasn't helpful to you, so I'm fine with dropping it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think it's controversial for anyone I've ever played with to say that it's more work to GM D&D by the default rules than it is to be a player by that default.</p><p></p><p>That doesn't make the GM special in so far as the dignity and trust they should be awarded by being a participant.</p><p></p><p>Putting unneeded pressure on the GM does certainly seem bad, and so a thread on how D&D can still be D&D but put less pressure on the DMs seems great. Merely repeating that everyone always blames the players and not GM and that other games do it better seems much less useful to me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Completely agree with the part I bolded.</p><p></p><p>Yes, play can be suspended if a single player can't make it, and we will do that for particularly pivotal scenes. (Three weeks working up to something makes it sad to have someone not there). If we needed all of the players to be at every session for the last few games I've been in we would have cancelled around 1/4 of them (with 4 players and allowing play in most cases if only one was missing). We discussed that as a group before deciding it was ok.</p><p></p><p>The alternate activity seems to work a lot better in person with my group than on-line, but even those who can make it have other things to do and might catch up on that instead of playing a board game. (At one point I was missing Thursday night MtG for a D&D game, so if D&D wasn't happening I'd go do that. I liked the D&D group, I also liked the other one.) My son's group is just fine playing Roblox online or whatnot.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure how this is relevant to my post. If I was addressing "Trust the GM" it was to say "Being trustworthy is a necessary but not sufficient quality to be a good GM. Being a GM doesn't make one trustworthy."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In many other threads it was brought up that one common thing is for a prospective GM to pitch an idea, and if it's bought into - possibly with suggestions of the potential players being offered and accounted for, and session 0 goes well, then you have a game with a general outline based on the modified pitch. If you a player doesn't like the pitch or session 0, then they should have voiced that well before play started.</p><p></p><p>Has a single person on here said GMs shouldn't look at their own play?</p><p></p><p>As for adapting to the table, it feels like some folks on here have games that have been going on for 20 years (or what not) with a lot of potential players who want to join. A player who joins such a game where the others are happy and thinks a major change should happen... seems odd.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Who on here has said GMs shouldn't be questioned?</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure why everything in the thread somehow has to be about "Trust the GM" and "Never Trust the Players". Insisting others are trying to rationalize or approve that doesn't seem helpful.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 8608926, member: 6701124"] I find it odd that you wouldn't have more faith/hope/expectation in a GM that you heard good things about than one you hadn't heard anything. But YMMV. Were the areas of mismatch not gone over in session 0? What questions/information could be put in a session to avoid these mismatch problems. "Why is the arrow only one direction?" It doesn't seem to be, but I can't think of any other ways to convey that it isn't. Who says GMs are inviolate? In what sense? No one has said all GMs are good. Lots of people say D&D is set up by default where the GM has the final say in play. Because it is set up that way in the rules, isn't it? I never said it was a great model, and gave a second (not-great one) with a higher percent of badness for the DM. The idea was just how there are more non-DM players than DM players, and so the P[at least one bad player] can be a lot larger than P[player j is bad]. Which seems relevant to a game continuing if one wanted to work out the odds. Obviously it wasn't helpful to you, so I'm fine with dropping it. I don't think it's controversial for anyone I've ever played with to say that it's more work to GM D&D by the default rules than it is to be a player by that default. That doesn't make the GM special in so far as the dignity and trust they should be awarded by being a participant. Putting unneeded pressure on the GM does certainly seem bad, and so a thread on how D&D can still be D&D but put less pressure on the DMs seems great. Merely repeating that everyone always blames the players and not GM and that other games do it better seems much less useful to me. Completely agree with the part I bolded. Yes, play can be suspended if a single player can't make it, and we will do that for particularly pivotal scenes. (Three weeks working up to something makes it sad to have someone not there). If we needed all of the players to be at every session for the last few games I've been in we would have cancelled around 1/4 of them (with 4 players and allowing play in most cases if only one was missing). We discussed that as a group before deciding it was ok. The alternate activity seems to work a lot better in person with my group than on-line, but even those who can make it have other things to do and might catch up on that instead of playing a board game. (At one point I was missing Thursday night MtG for a D&D game, so if D&D wasn't happening I'd go do that. I liked the D&D group, I also liked the other one.) My son's group is just fine playing Roblox online or whatnot. I'm not sure how this is relevant to my post. If I was addressing "Trust the GM" it was to say "Being trustworthy is a necessary but not sufficient quality to be a good GM. Being a GM doesn't make one trustworthy." In many other threads it was brought up that one common thing is for a prospective GM to pitch an idea, and if it's bought into - possibly with suggestions of the potential players being offered and accounted for, and session 0 goes well, then you have a game with a general outline based on the modified pitch. If you a player doesn't like the pitch or session 0, then they should have voiced that well before play started. Has a single person on here said GMs shouldn't look at their own play? As for adapting to the table, it feels like some folks on here have games that have been going on for 20 years (or what not) with a lot of potential players who want to join. A player who joins such a game where the others are happy and thinks a major change should happen... seems odd. Who on here has said GMs shouldn't be questioned? I'm not sure why everything in the thread somehow has to be about "Trust the GM" and "Never Trust the Players". Insisting others are trying to rationalize or approve that doesn't seem helpful. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How has D&D changed over the decades?
Top